[all] Update to k/k v1.21.0 #1440
Conversation
k8s-ci-robot
added
release-note-none
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
size/L
|
Build succeeded.
|
|
Build failed.
|
|
Build failed.
|
|
Build failed.
|
ramineni
changed the title
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
|
Build failed.
|
|
Build failed.
|
|
Build failed.
|
|
Build failed.
|
|
Build succeeded.
|
|
Build failed.
|
|
Build succeeded.
|
|
Build succeeded.
|
ramineni
force-pushed
the
update-kk-1.21
branch
from
6aaa10a to
6ee77b3
Compare
|
Build succeeded.
|
|
Build succeeded.
|
|
Build succeeded.
|
ramineni
changed the title
k8s-ci-robot
removed
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
|
Build failed.
|
|
Build succeeded.
|
|
Build failed.
|
|
Build failed.
|
|
Build succeeded.
|
|
/test cloud-provider-openstack-acceptance-test-e2e-conformance-stable-branch-v1.19 |
|
@ramineni: The specified target(s) for
Use In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
/test cloud-provider-openstack-acceptance-test-e2e-conformance-stable-branch-v1.20 |
|
@ramineni: The specified target(s) for
Use In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
/test cloud-provider-openstack-acceptance-test-lb-octavia |
|
@ramineni: The specified target(s) for
Use In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
/test cloud-provider-openstack-acceptance-test-keystone-authentication-authorization |
|
@ramineni: The specified target(s) for
Use In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
Build failed.
|
|
Build failed.
|
|
Build succeeded.
|
|
Build succeeded.
|
|
|
||
| fs.BoolVar(&versionFlag, "version", false, "Print version and exit") | ||
| fss := cliflag.NamedFlagSets{} | ||
| command := app.NewCloudControllerManagerCommand(ccmOptions, cloudInitializer, app.DefaultInitFuncConstructors, fss, wait.NeverStop) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is this going to change cobra.command from openstack-cloud-controller-manager to cloud-controller-manager? if yes, we should perhaps modify manifests also?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nope, the command is not changed, but the help message will look weird as it's saying:
Usage:
cloud-controller-manager [flags]
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ramineni I don't think we could resolved the --version issue perfectly as it's defined in NewCloudControllerManagerCommand method.
$ ./openstack-cloud-controller-manager --version
Kubernetes v0.0.0-master+$Format:%H$
One workaround I can think of is to define a different param (e.g. occm-version) to maintain our own version, or we leave it to k8s community to provide a mechanism for cloud providers. What do you think?
cc @jichenjc
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ramineni I don't think we could resolved the --version issue perfectly as it's defined in NewCloudControllerManagerCommand method.
@lingxiankong right. From here it looked to me that it should take the values from ldflags , https://github.com/kubernetes/component-base/blob/master/version/version.go#L29 , but doesnt seem to work .
One workaround I can think of is to define a different param (e.g. occm-version) to maintain our own version, or we leave it to k8s community to provide a mechanism for cloud providers. What do you think?
@lingxiankong +1, I checked a lil bit on this before , couldnt get it working as not clean mechanism provided yet . Ill get to this option again . Let me also check with cloudprovider team if they have any other options. Thanks.
I'll raise a bug to track this issue in meantime
There was a problem hiding this comment.
One workaround I can think of is to define a different param (e.g. occm-version) to maintain our own version, or we leave it to k8s community to provide a mechanism for cloud providers. What do you think?
+1 to me as well, we can provide some quick solution for now and overtime let's switch to cloud-provider way
|
The job At this stage, I will test manually in my v1.21 cluster and override the job if everything looks ok. |
|
looking good /override openlab/cloud-provider-openstack-acceptance-test-keystone-authentication-authorization |
|
@lingxiankong: Overrode contexts on behalf of lingxiankong: openlab/cloud-provider-openstack-acceptance-test-keystone-authentication-authorization In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
also tested occm in my v1.21 cluster (in the similar way of the e2e test script) /override openlab/cloud-provider-openstack-acceptance-test-lb-octavia |
|
@lingxiankong: Overrode contexts on behalf of lingxiankong: openlab/cloud-provider-openstack-acceptance-test-lb-octavia In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
Now I'm looking at the occm version issue. |
|
@ramineni we could merge this one and propose PR to fix the version stuff later on. /lgtm |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: jichenjc The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
approved
What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR updates k/k to v1.21.0. Some of the test packages have been moved different location in latest k/k repo.
This PR is to sync with the same before adding any new tests.
Which issue this PR fixes(if applicable):
fixes #
Special notes for reviewers:
Release note: